| 1 |
On 2020-01-13 23:42, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 12:37:11 +0100, n952162 wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>>>> The portage tree is sync'ed to the portage tree mirrors. A newer fs |
| 5 |
>>>>> snapshot won't include the tree itself, but it will include the new |
| 6 |
>>>>> default fs locations for the portage directory. |
| 7 |
>>>> Not sure what you mean ... you mean that the portage tree only comes |
| 8 |
>>>> in with the emerge --sync? |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> A preliminary copy isn't in the stage3 tarball? |
| 11 |
>>> That's correct. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>> is this happening because I'm not using (the "optional") webrsync? |
| 15 |
> It happens because the stage 3 doesn't contain a tree. The handbook tells |
| 16 |
> you to run a sync after unpacking the stage 3 for that reason. webrsync |
| 17 |
> is just another way of syncing, one that is more efficient than rsync |
| 18 |
> when starting with an empty tree. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
I mean, am I getting these manifest/verification errors because I |
| 22 |
haven't used webrsync (apparently not). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Which leaves me in a deadlocked situation. A fresh install, according |
| 25 |
to the instructions, on new hardware, fails. What should I do? Does |
| 26 |
anyone else have this problem? |
Archives